Forum Post: what if there were a secret revision of local court rules preventing development of effective mental health care?
Posted 11 months ago on Dec. 15, 2012, 10:26 p.m. EST by rayolite
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
There was, in 2005. The ACLU doesn't care, elite.
The revision was an "abrogation" by the judicial council and removed the "Assignments of Magistrates and Judge" section from the local court rules.
What if the local court rules, written by the supreme court were written to facilitate removal of access to courts in civil rights cases?
Pro se civil rights plaintiffs are cycled through the same judge, EVEN if the number of co-plaintiffs increases showing a serious problem. The old rules gave a new magistrate and judge to the plaintiffs.
This developed in post civil war, rights reconstruction because African Americans could not get their rights from some judges.
We lost it in the 9th circuit in 2005.
The case had no defenses and asked the US district court to compel a municipality to follow a state law mandating that the local state funded mental health department "work with the public to develop investigational or experimental treatments if there is a chance of loss of life with out it."
It works with the 86% of the human brain we know little about, the unconscious. Hmmm, what is unconscious is better than secret. Got problem w/secrecy?